Setting evidence 'inconclusive';Letter

7th May 1999 at 01:00
The report on setting pupils for mathematics (TES, April 16) did not accurately represent my views. I did not say that the Office for Standards in Education report Setting in primary schools is "flimsy and inconclusive". This comment was made about the existing research evidence.

Nor did I say that the practice of setting is "damaging". In fact, I said that there may be pragmatic reasons for setting pupils for maths in Years 5 and 6 because planning can be easier if the attainment range in class is not too wide.

My views on setting are expressed in the Framework for teaching mathematics which was sent to schools in March.

Anita Straker

Director, National Centre for Literacy and Numeracy

59-65 London Street, Reading

Subscribe to get access to the content on this page.

If you are already a Tes/ Tes Scotland subscriber please log in with your username or email address to get full access to our back issues, CPD library and membership plus page.

Not a subscriber? Find out more about our subscription offers.
Subscribe now
Existing subscriber?
Enter subscription number


The guide by your side – ensuring you are always up to date with the latest in education.

Get Tes magazine online and delivered to your door. Stay up to date with the latest research, teacher innovation and insight, plus classroom tips and techniques with a Tes magazine subscription.
With a Tes magazine subscription you get exclusive access to our CPD library. Including our New Teachers’ special for NQTS, Ed Tech, How to Get a Job, Trip Planner, Ed Biz Special and all Tes back issues.

Subscribe now